Re: Radiation hormesis

[GACarlson@aol.com]

I'm disappointed if hormesis' contribution is limited to supporting a 
generalized, qualitative objection that radiation safety regulations are 
somehow too strict.

Glenn
GACarlson@aol.com

In a message dated 05/06/99 3:17:52 PM Central Daylight Time, 
fritz.strydom@ors.gatech.edu writes:

>  I think the point of all of this is not to try and legislate hormesis, 
> because
>  this cannot be reasonably done.  I believe that the point is that dose 
> limits and
>  contamination limits are set far below reasonable levels.  Having the dose 
> to the
>  general public from a decommissioned facility (25 mrem/yr) equal to about
>  one-fourth the difference between the background dose in Atlanta and 
Denver 
> does
>  not make sense.  Regulatory limits have been decreased to levels which are 
> not
>  justifiable.
>    
>  
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html